LAWS(ORI)-2014-12-74

BANAMALI NANDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On December 08, 2014
Banamali Nanda Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals having arisen out of the common judgment dated 18-1-1991 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bargarh in Sessions Trial No. 100/24 of 1990 have been heard together and the common judgment to follow shall dispose of all the three.

(2.) Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that in the month of January, 1989, deceased-Urmila was given in marriage to Suru alias Sadhucharan alias Radhamohan. From the side of the groom, there was demand of one Yezdi motor-cycle and 8 tolas of gold. The father of the deceased had given only four tolas of gold and one moped. The in-laws were not satisfied with the same and started ill-treating the deceased. The deceased stayed in her matrimonial home only for seventeen days. She came to her father's house and stayed there for 22 days. She was reluctant to go to her in-laws' house for the torture meted out to her. However, she was persuaded by her family member and was taken to her in-laws house. Seven days thereafter the father of deceased got the death news of his daughter from his brother-in-law (wife's brother). On reaching the house of the accused persons, he could know that they have already cremated the dead body of his daughter. The informant suspecting foul play lodged the FIR on 20-3-1989 in Bheden Police Station which was registered under Ss. 498-A/304-B of Indian Penal Code and under Ss. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After registration of the case as the investigation was not conducted properly by the Officer-in-Charge, Bheden Police Station, the same was handed over to the Circle Inspector, Bargarh. Still there was laxity in investigation which gave rise to a large scale resentment from the public. The investigation was ultimately transferred to the Crime Branch which submitted the charge-sheet against the accused persons to stand their trial.

(3.) The plea of the accused persons was one of the denial. Further, they have stated in their statement under S. 313, Cr. P.C. that the deceased was sick and she died due to her ailment.